Not true; it's very possible for one driver to be charged with careless while another is charged with another offense, possibly careless as well. USUALLY only one driver is charged, but it can be both / multiple drivers. As for the follow to close, that CAN'T be laid unless there's a witness that can say that the following vehicle was too close... in most rear enders, there is no such witness, there's just a collision.
Very true. I used to have a link to a matrix that demonstrated very clearly how fault would be allocated for insurance and some of the reasoning is almost BACKWARDS to the HTA. I did find a link to the Insurance Act that shows some scenarios but not as good as the one I had in mind;
http://www.insurancehotline.com/at-fault-rules/
Actually it's 32 km/h.
Being that e-bikes are treated as bicycles, she DIDN'T own the entire lane as would have been the case if she was on a motorcycle. The cyclist / e-biker is responsible to turn out to the right (move right) while being passed while the passing vehicle is responsible to turn out to the left (move left) when safe to complete the pass. That careless was laid would indicate that not only did she not turn out to the right, she did something without due care and attention which the OP said was to dart out to the left.
That said, a safer practice is to pass "out of lane" as you would do for a motor vehicle.
As for laying the bike down to stop, sigh... I don't get it however it could be that it was laid down in a last second attempt to avoid the collision vs trying to stop.
Agreed. With the behaviour of many e-bikes I've seen, I'm surprised we don't see many of them wedged under a vehicle more often.
Bookmarks